OK, you're right we don't post a lot of picture for you. So I have attach 2 screen capture in this message.

They are evidently not safe for work and NFBSK. This is a zip file so no reason for anybody to watch them unless they want to (I have a sentiment that some guys will check anyway, they are too curious )

My ImpressionI've bought this one without knowing anything about it, in fact my reason was that it's one of the first important movie role of Barbara Hershey. You know already that this movie is in my top ten list and this is certainly one of the best three movie I've seen in my life. Of course this movie is the best blind buy I've ever made. The story deal with the relation between 3 New York friends during their summer vacation and a new shy girl from Cleveland who joins the trio. Written like that it looks like a boring Walt Disney familly movie, but you know that if it would be the case this movie would have nothing to do on my list. The film is completly centered around the 4 teenagers (the adult are non entity in this movie, except for a little exception) and how the teenagers are cruel and manipulative with each others (we tend to forgot that fact, but we were like that too at this time). I can't say a lot about what happen in the movie because all the actions explain the end. A very great performance by the 4 young actors : Barbara Hershey, Richard Thomas, Bruce Davison and Catherine Burns (she was nominated for an Oscar). This is really important since bad acting would have harmed strongly the movie.

Now I go on a rant : I find inconceivable that this movie is not available on DVD. It was nominated for an Oscar in 1970, 3 big stars are in it and Evan Hunter had written the novel. I just can't understand why MGM refuse to release it on DVD, when they continue to release unimportant crappy movies. It will be the 40 years birthday of the movie release next years, so maybe there are some hope for a special edition in 2009.

If you find this one buy it immediatly, try to get the original X rated version and not the R rated cut version it's really important for understanding the end.

I googled a tiny bit and from what I found it already seems somewhat doubtful they will release it. However, if you indeed mean there is an X-rated version I am at least rather certain that Warner won't release that. Maybe another studio may do so, releasing the Unrated (X) next to the R (like was done with "Thriller: A Cruel Picture"), but Warner releasing hardcore...?

It does seem to be an interesting film and I would like to see it too. Maybe someone will release it eventually.

I googled a tiny bit and from what I found it already seems somewhat doubtful they will release it. However, if you indeed mean there is an X-rated version I am at least rather certain that Warner won't release that. Maybe another studio may do so, releasing the Unrated (X) next to the R (like was done with "Thriller: A Cruel Picture"), but Warner releasing hardcore...?

It does seem to be an interesting film and I would like to see it too. Maybe someone will release it eventually.

The X rating was received because of the subject and not the nudity. In fact there are some breast shown (maybe at 2 or 3 occasions) but no frontal nudity or man nudity and a lot of modern R rated films show more nudity than this one. I know the reason why it was rated this way, this is the end of the films that was disturbing at that time and probably is always today.

Like I've said this is not a X rated film for the same reasons than Thriller, but most like Midnight Cowboy made the same year.

The X rating was received because of the subject and not the nudity. In fact there are some breast shown (maybe at 2 or 3 occasions) but no frontal nudity or man nudity and a lot of modern R rated films show more nudity than this one. I know the reason why it was rated this way, this is the end of the films that was disturbing at that time and probably is always today.

Like I've said this is not a X rated film for the same reasons than Thriller, but most like Midnight Cowboy made the same year.

I get it. Although the one synopsis I found also mentioned a bottomless Bruce Davison (or was Richard Thomas ). Bottomless doesn't necessarily mean frontal nudity though... I saw at IMDb that the film was originally rated 16 in Germany, which was later revised to 12. I would assume that that's uncut (as we also have an 18 rating), but can't be sure.

OverviewChristina Lindberg (THRILLER: A CRUEL PICTURE and ANITA) stars in this incredibly sexy US-Swedish co-production. Young Inga (Lindberg), a country milk maid, longs for a trip to Stockholm, the Swedish capital. Leaving her rural home for a weekend in the big city, Inga soon discovers her beauty and (ample assets) gets her into a bit of trouble! Deserting her country life sensibilities for a slice of urban values, Inga’s romantic adventures will shock and entertain! MAID IN SWEDEN is an erotic coming of age story and is one of the very first film roles for cult-film starlet, Christina Lindberg.

My ImpressionAchim had just mentions in his previous post Thriller: A Cruel Picture and strangely a Christina Lindberg's movie was the next to be reviewed, Are you spying me in my house?

I'm a fan of miss Lindberg since I've watched Thriller: A Cruel Picture, I like the way her eyes always look sad and innocent (ok she had a nice body too ). This one is her first movie and it was made in english, but Christina Lindberg is dub (kind of sad since she had a wonderfull accent). The story is not that great or original and the acting is not great either, I don't understand why they had decided to made it in english since most of the problem with the movie is because of that decision (sure the acting is weak, the actors don't work in their language. I would be bad too if I had to talk in a foreign language for a film, not that I would be better in french ). The film is really slow and it takes a long time to have something happening. Not a bad movie, but not my favourite Christina Lindberg's movie (Exposed is my favourite)

OverviewSylvester Stallone and Rutger Hauer star in this riveting story of suspense and intrigue that starts in London, continues in Paris and reaches its chilling conclusion on the streets of New York.

When Europe's most feared terrorist (Hauer) explosively announces his presence in Manhattan, two elite undercover cops (Stallone and Billy Dee Williams) are assigned to stop him before he strikes again. But the ruthless terrorist has other plans for the city - and the detectives - in this spellbinding, cat-and-mouse thriller.

My ImpressionOne of the last good movie with Stallone before he became an Hollywood star and doesn't care anymore. Before you ask for me his last good movie is First Blood so I don't care for his career since 1982. The problem with this one is the studio interference in the production, this is really evident with the end if you look at Rutger Hauer. Good performance by Stallone, Hauer (always like him, he his a perfect cast choice to play a German terrorist. Ok he's Dutch but the accent doesn't look different to me) and Williams. It was great too to see Joe Spinell and Jamie Gillis in supporting role. Don't get to exited for Lindsay Wagner she really doesn't have a lot of screen time. Good action movie from a time when they were able to do it (no mtv editing, no annoying loud music, no cgi, ...).

Najemikon

Title : Nighthawks (1981)One of the last good movie with Stallone before he became an Hollywood star and doesn't care anymore. Before you ask for me his last good movie is First Blood so I don't care for his career since 1982.

I keep meaning to get this. Seen it a couple of times on TV, but never caught it in full.

I know what you mean about Stallone, but with the caveat that I do enjoy some his pure action roles, like Cliffhanger and Demolition Man. He could do so much more though. He always frustrates me as he is a media whore as well and got into a habit of rubbishing his last film to promote his next.

I remember him promoting Judge Dredd. He explained how knew The Specialist was rubbish as soon as he started, but Dredd? Best role he ever did.

Then he promoted Assassins by saying how he knew Dredd would fail from day one because it was based on a comic, but Cannon was making it too violent for the kiddies to watch. But Assassins? Best role he ever did.

I can't agree that Nighthawks was his last decent role. He was fantastic in Copland, not least because he was playing against the stereotype he'd created of himself. But as with everything else, he said how wonderful it was to do a proper role opposite great actors and how he was going to do more like it. So what did he do next?

He voiced an Ant. And then remade Get Carter, before almost disappearing into video hell with Driven.

The way I see it is that he have done a lot of good films at the beginning of his career. Rocky (76), F.I.S.T (78), Rocky II (79), Nighthawks (81), First Blood (82) and, for what I've read, Death Race 2000 (75). After that he had gone the "I'm a big Hollywood stars way" and I don't care for the script or my old friends anymore. I've a lot of money, I've a wife who support me since the beginning of my career (but I'm a star so I need a plastic wife, so enter Brigitte Nielsen) and they talk about me in all the tabloids.

After that a lot of bad movie : propaganda fest (Rocky IV/Rambo III), boring (Lock Up/Over the Top) or just stupid (Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot/Rhinestone).

I agree that Copland is ok, but it could have been much more better than that.

Najemikon

Yes, I agree with that in general, though I have to repeat that I really like Copland! By the way, I think Death Race is dreadful and I can't really say if it should be considered an important film for Sly!

This serie is the perfect exemple of what was a New York roughies. This genre was the NY answer to the nudie cutie and the nudist colony films and being from NY those movies are really different : they use a lot of violence usually against the women, a lot of nudity and usually they are film without sounds (good way to hide the fact that acting was not the strongest quality of those actresses).The genre will evolve in a more explicit way in the seventies with movies like Forced Entry, Hot Summer in the City or Sex Wish.

Title : White Slaves of Chinatown (1964)

OverviewIn the first of the series, Olga uses pot parties and comic-book violence to turn Gigi Darlene and other female captives into her WHITE SLAVES OF CHINATOWN before putting them to work as drug-addicted hookers. But Olga has her tender side too and, in the mood for romance selects an occasional slave for a little lesbian loving: "The disease called Olga cannot be fought!"

My ImpressionNow we talk of a film made in 1964, so you have to lower your expectations. This movie was shocking when it was released but not so much 44 years later. It doesn't countain a lot of nudity and the torture scenes are really short (one involving a bench vise and an hand is particullary well done). The movie use 2 narators (Audrey Campbell and Joel Holt) to explain the story and this naration is perfect. Audrey Campbell who plays the title role had a very strong screen presence, this is not a surprise since she is a real actress. Another point of interest : this is one of the few Gigi Darlene's movies available (a very beautifull German actress with a too short 7 years career). Promising start to a good film serie.

Rating :

Title : Olga's Girls (1964)

OverviewHeadquartered in New York's Chinatown, where Communists provide a steady stream of dangerous drugs from the Orient, sadist Olga Saglo deals in narcotics and white slavery. Her drug-addicted slaves, brutally tortured for the slightest offense, rely on each other for comfort. When Olga suspects there is an informant among them, she stops at nothing to make sure her operation doesn’t fall apart. Donning her evil rubber “Cape of Persuasion”, Olga resorts to chastity belts, blow torches and even electrocution to find the “snitch”. But some of her girls have another plan in mind, a plan of revenge...

My ImpressionThis one continue in the same vain except that this time it's relatively more violent. The torture scenes are shown, not that they are really graphic but the electrocution scene is interesting to watch and you get a girls fight between Audrey Campbell and Ricky Bell. This one as a story contrary to the other so there are some interesting development and Olga is caught at her game. The cast in this one include Audrey Campbell, Darlene Bennett (one of the most beautifull NY performer of this time) and Alice Denham (Playboy playmate of the month of July 1956). The movie is narrated again by Joel Holt and Audrey Campbell.

Rating :

Title : Olga's House of Shame (1964)

OverviewWith the help of Nick, her malignant brother and a sweet-faced Elaine, a victim-turned-protégé, Olga runs a crime syndicate while gleefully engaging in such extracurricular activities as bondage, torture, and the always popular "horse discipline."

My ImpressionThis one was filmed out of New York, a nice change of scenery that gives a lot of good outdoor action. The place is in the forest and that gives a more isolation and helpless feeling. This one is the last one where Olga controls the organization and we see her teaching her method to the next boss (Alice Linville). The focus for the torture this time is on the bondage and the whipping (not too much realist by the way), but we have an electrocution scene. The movie uses one time again the naration mode, but this time the director add live sound too. Not surprisingly most of these actresses can't act, but Audrey Campbell, Alice Linville and W.B. Parker give a good acting performance. Not too much known actresses in this one (even for me) : Ella Daphne (Sin in the Suburbs) and Alice Denham (from the previous one) are the only one that I know with Audrey Campbell and Alice Linville. One of the girl credited as Robin is really cute (she looks a little bit like Jenilee Harrison) and Brenda Denaut the mother of Patricia and Rosanna Arquette is in this.

Rating :

Title : Olga's Dance Hall Girls (1966)

OverviewThings take a bizarre turn with the most obscure Olga of them all, OLGA'S DANCE HALL GIRLS, in which a new brat-faced Olga recruits suburban housewives as "hostesses" for a dance hall which is really just a front for - are you ready? - a satanic cult!

My ImpressionThe first time I've watched this film my reaction was very bad because this movie had nothing to do with the Olga serie. There is no sadism in it, no prostitution ring, no narration and even a fake new Olga. But sometimes with a little time our oppinions can change and this is the case with this one. In fact this is not really a roughies but a little NY nudie and I've decided to accept it as it is. The acting is surprisingly good for this genre of movie, most of the cast member sound natural and credible. Many familliar faces appear in it as well (maybe that's why I like it more) : Linda Boyce (Electronic Lover), Uta Erickson (The Ultimate Degenerate), Larry Hunter (The Amazing Transplant) and the girl who played Olga look familliar but she had no other film credit (this is probably an alias). No sadism but to compensate we got a great underwear fight between Uta Erickson and some other girl. So if you take it as an Olga film this is a piece of crap, but if you take as a stand alone movie this is a perfectly well made NY nudie.

Rating :

Olga's Massage Parlor who is the fourth films in this serie is actually lost, but we never know those films sometimes reappear in the weirdest place. I hope that it will be find someday since Alice Linville (Sin in the Suburbs), Jackie Miller (Olga's House of Shame) and W.B. Parker (Sin in the Suburbs) are in this film

OverviewFor his sole foray into the sex comedy genre, Mario Bava delivers a swinging orgy of mod design, leering humor and daring late '60s erotica. American leading man Bret Halsey and former Miss Italy Daniela Giordano star in this Rashomon-inspired tale of a playboy and a virgin's first date that may or may not have included rape, nymphomania, lesbianism, and groovy inflatable furniture.

My ImpressionTake 2 (my first one was lost because of a server problem and I've forgot to save it before)

This is my favourite from all the Mario Bava's movies that I've watched. This movie had a naivety that I like, this is a sex comedy but with nothing shocking in it. The movie tell a love date between a man and woman that doesn't end in a perfect way. What make this film special is the way it is tell to the viewer, in fact the night events are told from four differents point of view : the woman, the man, the housing complex janitor and a psychiatrist (the narrator). Of course each versions are different and we never know what had really happen. Well acted, good cinematography (check for the little difference in the decor between the story) and a nice soundtrack. Like I've said this is certainly the most chaste sex comedy that I own, but I really like its charm.

OverviewTake the last train to Smutville for some down-home Country Love in classic early ’70s softcore style!

Yes, it’s sex, sex, and more sex in the sticks as MARIA ARNOLD and JOHN CAMBRIDGE play a married couple with a bored wanker on their hands. After moving to an isolated cabin in the woods, they soon discover they’ve lost that lovin’ feeling. Actually, he’s the one who lost it as they "haven’t balled in over six months!" Poor Maria is as frustrated and horny as a raccoon in heat. "Why don’t you get free enough to ball me sometime," she complains while strutting about naked and fondling herself in the bathtub.

So she strolls naked down by the river where a group of hippies are skinny-dipping and groping one another in ways that happily leave little to the Deviate imagination. As she fingers herself in the sunshine, a naked black man with a perky pecker lays a heavy rap on her about "hang-ups" (remember them?). Then he de-frustrates her something good.

Meanwhile, John "sees" Maria wherever he goes -- she’s the gum-chewing waitress at a local tavern, and a kinky motorist who asks for directions -- and he fantasizes screwing "her" in each of these incarnations. (Miss Arnold plays these multiple roles with characteristic big-busted elan.)

When Maria returns to the cabin, old friends Pete and Annie are there visiting, straight from a Big Sur commune, and all three of them head back to the river to ball freely in the sunshine. Then Annie decides to "talk to John" whose formerly reluctant wiener instantly responds to her free-love argument. And when Pete and Maria invite some psychedelically painted hippies up to the cabin, a grand old orgy rocks the place...

My ImpressionNothing special with this one. Except for Maria Arnold and the country song nothing had interested me in this film. The acting is really weak, the image quality isn't great (too bright) and the girls (except for miss Arnold) aren't special. Not a recommandation unless you are a Maria Arnold fan like me.

OverviewThe wacky REEFER MADNESS in reverse, a.k.a. Aphrodisiac!, extols the benefits of marijuana as a sexual stimulant: "The secret of its sexual power has only been whispered about..till now!" Claiming to be "factual documentary dramatization" (whatever that is), porn stars tell us how marijuana changed their life.

My ImpressionWith all the bullshit movies made about the danger of the marijuana it's fun to have one that say the contrary, even if it is over the top too. One thing that I regret after watching it is to not have use it before sex while I was an user. It looks so great : one woman had 6 orgasms, love session runing for hours, ...

But you know that it's not a real documentary when you see Maria Arnold ,Sandy Dempsey , Suzanne Fields, Eve Orlon and John Holmes on screen. The fact remains that it's an interesting false documentary with some connection made between the end of the alcool prohibition and the criminalization of the marijuana that look plausible to me.

By the way this is a xxx films, but the movie countains a lot of stock footages on the marijuana in the US in the last century (police raid, old newspaper publicity, officials speech,...).